tv [untitled] March 31, 2011 1:00pm-1:30pm PDT
>> i'm willing to work with the appellant. we can zero in on what is necessary. we don't want to be going on a tangent. if you do this, you never get things done. that is my recommendation. i would be glad to work with you. the limitation would be too wet areas concerned him. we cannot have different issues to be exposed later. if it is that area, i am ok. >> i appreciate the opportunity to continue the discussion and i want ad there is some basic
confusion, i completely understand the issues that what goes on in the inside of the building is the matter for the property owners themselves. there are two responses, in a property that is in the national register, this would cover the whole building. i was not mentioning the matter of the interior door because i am objecting to it. i want to find the right solution to preserve this spot and allow them to do everything they want to do on the inside and whether that interior door looks like it is accomplishing what an architect might well drop out which is a way to deal with the accessibility between units when you are on the slope. we're talking about restoring
that door, and on the other hand we have the fact that the store fronts are like this. we can continue that in the future. thank you very much. >> does that answer your question? i will make a motion to continue. they are very full. >> i would like some time to deal with this. i think after may 25th is acceptable for us. i would like to have someone there personally. >> we will not have a full board. we can go to may 25th.
>> is anything that needs to go forward that we're not thinking about? >> if the permit was to be released, we would get a -- >> this does not affect the ongoing operation of this building? it does not affect the cooking school? >> we should add project sponsor. does this create a hardship? >> it surely does. we are very limited in space as
it is. i don't think it will take us very long to work out our differences, i really don't. this is minor. it is getting back to the agenda which is important. >> the specific point that you just raise has to do with the actions or lack of actions having to do with upholding or lifting the suspension or aspects of the permit that is yet to come before us. >> if we can uphold the department's permit, we are glad to work with you.
>> we have no problem. >> if we was up holding -- if we were delaying the suspension, i can guarantee you i would willing to bet a very large sums of money on the fact that the permit its issued without some effort to have worked out the issues at a time, it will be appealed. this has to do with the permit that is with us tonight and how much effect that will have on you. >> we have to get the documents
for the bidding process. this is public money. >> in the long run, we are saving you time. >> i think so. >> we're trying to have your process sooner rather than later. >> we appreciate that. >> if there is no amicable revolution, then it is entirely certain that the permit applications will get a --
>> i and a stand. >> then, the question was whether you would be ok with a continuous to may 20th fit to give you time to meet with everyone and hammer out a list that everyone is happy with. >> i will agree. >> thank you. >> if you reach an agreement, there's nothing that prevents them. >> i made a motion. >> to allow the parties to miss the permit to see if they can resolve this matter. you wanted a list of those that have been pulled on the property.
do you want to indicate from whom you would like that list? >> you have said the parties to get together. >> planning is one of the parties in this matter. did you want to allow for any additional briefing? >> how about we say five pages, three minutes. >> do you want this at the same time? >> commissioners, or you have a feeling about that. >> i think that's fine.